BCHRTBritish Columbia Human Rights Tribunal (Vancouver, Canada)
References in periodicals archive ?
Figliola dealt with a challenge to a BCHRT decision to hear a complaint on issues previously addressed by a review officer of the Workers' Compensation Board (WCB).
150) However, both the BCHRT and the HRTO have unhesitatingly applied Figliola to labour arbitration.
For the approach in BC see Young v Coast Mountain Bus Company Ltd, 2003 BCHRT 28 at paras 19-27 (available on CanLII); Complainant X v British Columbia (Ministry of Children and Family Development) (No 2), 2012 BCHRT 98 (available on CanLII); Szepat v British Columbia (Ministry of Children and Family Development), 2012 BCHRT 185 (available on CanLII).
91) The Board relied heavily on the BCHRT reasoning in Gill v.
Figliola v British Columbia (Workers' Compensation Board), 2008 BCHRT 374 (available on QL) [Figliola HRT].
Ministry of Health (24 August 2001), 2001 BCHRT 45, online: BC Human Rights Tribunal <http://www.
ibid (accommodating female workers); Central Alberta Dairy Pool, supra note 49; Dominion Colour v Teamsters Chemical Energy & Allied Workers, Local 1880 (Metcalfe Grievance) (1999), 83 LAC (4th) 330 (available on QL) (Ont); Ontario Public Service Employers Union v Hotel Dieu Hospital (Sebesta Grievance), [2001] OLAA no 659 (QL) (accommodating pregnant workers); Ontario Human Rights Commission v Simpsons-Sears, [1985] 2 SCR 536, 52 OR (2d) 799; Renaud, supra note 49; Commission scolaire regionale de Chambly v Bergevin [1994] 2 SCR 525, 115 DLR (4th) 609; Jones v CHE Pharmacy Inc, 2001 BCHRT 1, 29 CHRR 93 (accommodating religious workers).